Hi there "guru's" - can anyone please tell me the official scientific differences between the "cheap" zeolite (that "removes ammonia") and the "expensive" zeolith (that everyone "says" that must be used for a zeovit system) are?

And please - I don't want marketing answers - as those I already know....

(Neil - LappiesReef - 459b -> this is mainly directed at you 3 - or perhaps anyone else with either a geology or scientific degree who know the intricaces of these things)

AdSGuest

Hi there "guru's" - can anyone please tell me the official scientific differences between the "cheap" zeolite (that "removes ammonia") and the "expensive" zeolith (that everyone "says" that must be used for a zeovit system) are?

And please - I don't want marketing answers - as those I already know....

(Neil - LappiesReef - 459b -> this is mainly directed at you 3 - or perhaps anyone else with either a geology or scientific degree who know the intricaces of these things)

both refer to zeolitic mediums which house bacteria and remove things due to their ion exchange and affinities

some marketing

Unique zeolitic medium for selective removal of dissolved organic compounds through ionic and molecular adsorption, as well as passive uptake via the beneficial microbes that colonize the media; the combined result of these processes yields improved water quality and an important source of food (bacterioplankton) for corals and other suspension-feeding organisms.

As far as i am aware, they are different names for the same group of compunds. Both zeolite/zeolith/NeoZeo/etc all do the same thing in terms of adsorbing toxins, but where they differ is they have differnt binding properties. So some will bind more efficiently than others and will also bind different compounds. As dallasg points out, alot of it comes down to marketing.
ill look into it a bit more and get back to you

Jacques, it is the same thing bud. Here is a little extract worth reading

Zeolites are marketed by pet stores for use as a filter additive in aquariums. In aquariums, zeolites can be used to adsorb ammonia and other nitrogenous compounds. However, due to the high affinity of some zeolites for calcium, they may be less effective in hard water and may deplete calcium. Zeolite filtration is used in some marine aquaria to keep nutrient concentrations low for the benefit of corals adapted to nutrient-depleted waters.
Where and how the zeolite was formed is an important consideration for aquariums. Most Northern hemisphere natural zeolites were formed when molten lava came in contact with sea water, thereby 'loading' the zeolite with Na (sodium) sacrificial ions. These sodium ions will speciate with other ions in solution, thus the takeup of nitrogen in ammonia, with the release of the sodium. One deposit in southern Idaho near Bear River is a fresh water variety ( Na<.05%) In southern hemisphere zeolites, such as found in Australia, which were formed with fresh water, thus the calcium uptake on formation.
Zeolite is an effective ammonia filter, but must be used with some care, especially with delicate tropical corals that are sensitive to water chemistry and temperature.

As far as i am aware, they are different names for the same group of compunds. Both zeolite/zeolith/NeoZeo/etc all do the same thing in terms of adsorbing toxins, but where they differ is they have differnt binding properties. So some will bind more efficiently than others and will also bind different compounds. As dallasg points out, alot of it comes down to marketing.
ill look into it a bit more and get back to you

Click to expand...

Hello David - many thanks for your input. I really appreciate it.

I would really appreciate some more technical/scientific proof as well......

Jacquesb I would like to open a can of worms. In fresh water i use zeolite in filters to absorb ammonia. After a year I take the filter off the system and put in a mix of salt and water and let it stand in the sun. By doing this the zeolite releases all the ammonia. After a good bake i flush it with clean water. Zeolite is then recharged and good for another year. My point is in Marine water the salinty is so high that the zeolite will not absorb ammonia. The zeolite has one good benifit though it is more porous than LR. In a zeovit system you add chunks of zeolite and remove after awhile and replace with a new chunk?? Wont that be same as throwing a chuck of live rock away and adding a new chunk.

sea water only contains around 3% salt, which although tastes very slaty, isnt a very high concentration.

is more porous than LR. In a zeovit system you add chunks of zeolite and remove after awhile and replace with a new chunk

Click to expand...

the zeolite will adsorb the ammonia and being porous has an extrrmely high surface area. These two facters make ideal conditions (ie food and space) for bacterial growth, which will then remove the ammonia and allow for more ammonia to be adsorbed.

The aim of this study was to examine the influence of seawater electrolytes on removal of phosphate by zeolite synthesized from fly ash (ZFA). A low-calcium ZFA was initially saturated with Na+, Mg2+, Ca2+, Al3+, and Fe3+. Al- and Fe-ZFA showed nearly complete removal of phosphate regardless of the major seawater electrolytes, pH, and salinity. This result was explained primarily on the basis of the adsorption mechanism through the formation of inner-sphere complexes. The remaining ZFAs showed lower phosphate removal performance, in general with the order of Ca-ZFA > Mg-ZFA > Na-ZFA. Compared with pure water, increase of electrolyte concentration or salinity initially enhanced phosphate uptake but then reduced phosphate removal. The individual presence of major seawater electrolytes all facilitated the retention of phosphate, with CaCl2 being the most effective. The mechanism for phosphate removal by Na-, Mg-, and Ca-ZFA was due mostly to precipitation. Repeated batch equilibration experiments indicated that, compared with pure water, ZFA had greater sorptive capacity for phosphate (except for Ca-ZFA, whose capacity decreased slightly) and had lower reversibility for sorbed phosphate in marine electrolytes. In conclusion, our results suggest that presence of seawater electrolytes had roughly no effect, or even positive effects, on the removal of phosphate by ZFA.

Toxicity Identification Evaluations (TIEs) can be used to determine the specific toxicant(s), including ammonia, causing toxicity observed in marine sediments. Two primary TIE manipulations are available for characterizing and identifying ammonia in marine sediments: Ulva lactuca addition and zeolite addition. In this study, we compared the efficacy of these methods to (1) remove NHx and NH3 from overlying and interstitial waters and (2) reduce toxicity to the amphipod Ampelisca abdita and mysid Americamysis bahia using both spiked and environmentally contaminated sediments. The utility of aeration for removing NHx and NH3 during a marine sediment TIE was also evaluated preliminarily. In general, the U. lactuca and zeolite addition methods performed similarly well at removing spiked NHx and NH3 from overlying and interstitial waters compared to an unmanipulated sediment. Toxicity to the amphipod was reduced approximately the same by both methods. However, toxicity to the mysid was most effectively reduced by the U. lactuca addition indicating this method functions best with epibenthic species exposed to ammonia in the water column. Aeration removed NHx and NH3 from seawater when the pH was adjusted to 10; however, very little ammonia was removed at ambient pHs (8.0). This comparison demonstrates both U. lactuca and zeolite addition methods are effective TIE tools for reducing the concentrations and toxicity of ammonia in whole sediment toxicity tests.

The decomposition of unconsumed food is one of the ammonium sources in aquaculture. In an earlier work we studied the action of zeolites on ammonium elimination and we found an effective reduction of this cation but if zeolite is present in small doses, it seems that it potentiates ammonium formation, and produces possibly a catalytic action to which zeolitic products are disposed, or stimulates the microbial activity.
In the present work we studied the possible influence of a zeolite on the transformation of ammonium to nitrite in conditions of normal oxygenation and under artificial oxygenation in sea water. We also report on the effect of zeolite on NH4+ appearance produced by fish food decomposition.

Modification on natural clinoptilolite zeolite for its NH4+ retention capacity

Vinay Kumar Jha and Shigeo Hayashi

The scope of this study was to modify the natural clinoptilolite zeolite available locally (Akita Prefecture, Japan) for its ammonium ions retention capacity. The natural clinoptilolite was modified chemically and mechanically with changing time duration of sodium hydroxide treatment and ball to powder mass ratio in wet ball milling, respectively. The ammonium ions retention capacity of thus obtained modified clinoptilolites were found to sharply increase with either increasing alkaline metal cations content or increasing specific surface area (decreasing particle size) of the clinoptilolite. The main mechanism of ammonium ions retention is ion exchange and Na+ ions were observed to be more easily exchanged for ammonium ions. The sorption isotherms were good fit to the Langmuir model in the cases of natural and chemically modified clinoptilolites while Freundlich model was favorable in the case of mechanically modified clinoptilolites. The maximum NH4+ retention capacities of natural clinoptilolite (NZeo), clinoptilolite treated with NaOH solution for 72 h (Zeo-72) and wet-milled clinoptilolite (WM-50) according to Langmuir model were 0.89, 1.15 and 1.39 mmol/g, respectively. The overall reaction is pseudo-second-order with rate constant of 3.6 × 10−2 dm3 g/(mmol min). It was possible to enhance the NH4+ retention capacity of natural clinoptilolite just by decreasing particle size without incorporating any further exchangeable cations within the framework of zeolite.